How We Know What We Know — Christian Edition, pt.2
Frankly… I’m worried. Some have taken these blogs and attacked them (one preacher at a small church in Florida recently printed excerpts and called them “a Common Lie”) but that is not unusual or troubling. What troubles me are those who see that the Bible has some human words — in other words, God did not use the writers as stenographers — and then allow their faith to spiral out of control. This is especially odd to me because these studies increased my faith in Jesus as the Son of God and in God as a good and righteous God. And I treasure the Bible, even the bits that strike me as horrific or the parts I know were heavily edited (not that many, by the way) by later writers such as Ezra. I have tried to help those whose faith was in the perfection of the Bible rather than the perfection of Jesus with a few blogs here but that doesn’t seem to help them. I would rather pull this blog down permanently than allow that to continue but, before I take that step, let me try again.
One sweet soul wrote me and said “All I get now is ‘Jesus existed.’” Whoa. Seriously? Just because the Canaanite genocide cannot, I believe, be laid at the feet of God and because the Bible has some internal disagreements about God, how much David paid for a place to worship, or the number of people who went here or there we have to trash the book and our story and our faith? That is such an incredible leap that I have a hard time following it. It seems to go like this:
1. The Bible is how I know about God and Jesus.
2. The Bible is not completely and utterly inerrant about everything.
3. Therefore, I can’t trust anything it has to say about God or Jesus.
Let me ask you some questions to help you see why the above set of propositions and conclusions is not accurate or reasonable.
1. The Bible is not our only source of knowledge about God and Jesus. We also have a huge amount of historical records that back up the story of Jesus complete with incredible miracles and his resurrection. Read Lee Strobel’s “The Case For Christ” and “The Case For the Resurrection” for starters. Lee was an investigative reporter for a major Midwest paper who found that history backs up our story and faith. His books are very readable and accurate. If you want some serious meat on the table, read NT Wright’s “The Resurrection of the Son of God” or his slightly more accessible “How God Became King.” Wright has written a great deal about the human touches in our Bible and it certainly hasn’t hurt his faith any! He is one of the most respected scholars I know and I use him as a go-to guy when I have questions.
We also know about God through nature. He said we could see Him there and we can. That is why CS Lewis, when speaking of God via the Aslan character in his series “The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe” said “He is good, but he is not safe.” That’s one of my favorite quotes, by the way. As a scientist, I see God in nature everywhere I look. And I know that a God who made all of these things wants to include us in His story. I see His story (and our story, my story) in nature and in our book as well as in the church — the community of God. The Bible was collected by believers over centuries. The books they chose were meaningful to them and to us for they tell our story — even the bits we got wrong are our story. But here is the thing most of us assume and never get around to thinking about: when the canon was closed, was it closed by God or man? I was taught that the Holy Spirit gathered the books, everyone agreed on them, and then He quit inspiring us outside of those books. NONE of that is from God or taught via the books we gathered. That was just a huge assumption we made. So what am I saying? I am saying that nature is one of our books, the Bible is a collection of our books, and our church community is another part of our story — another book, as it were. The canon was not closed; God is still at work. While I do not look for a special missive from God via an apostle now living, I see God’s wisdom in Strobel, Wright, Josh Graves, Chris Seidman, and a thousand others. I see it when I listen to elders gather to pray for their flock. I see a message from God in the work of Mother Teresa, in the hymns we sing, in the diverse gathering I see sharing faith and love via the Lord’s Supper every Sunday… and on and on. The Bible is part of our story but it is not the whole story. Jesus is the reason for our story from creation to now to what is yet to be revealed. Evidence? We are surrounded by it, immersed by it, and part of it.
Jesus told us this. He told us that where two or three of us were gathered in His Name, he would be right in the middle of our gathering. He didn’t qualify this by saying we had to believe this or that; he just promised his presence. He told his followers that if they agreed about something among themselves, he would agree with us in heaven. So the canon is continued in our lives, worship, discussions, and work. If something in my life hits a discordant note with the rest of scripture or with the example of Jesus or with the community of faith in which I serve, then I can assume that God is letting me know I am out of line. I need to sing His song in His community while I am about His work and telling His story.
2. The Bible was written by humans. Sometimes they didn’t record everything right but the fact is that MOST of the Bible — the vast majority — seems to be not only accurate but authoritative. When we hit a discordant note, we go to the life of Jesus to see if his example can show us how to view this or that story. When we hear different versions of how many times the cock crowed before Peter cursed and denied Jesus, we don’t get tied up in the minutiae but remember that the story has a point. We learn the point of the story and move on. Think of the Aurora shooter (I refuse to give his name any publicity). Witnesses differ on every single aspect of the timeline, who was shot when, how he moved or looked, and on and on. And yet, they all agree that a bad guy entered the theater and shot innocent people and that was a horrible evil. THAT is the point. If we find that two witnesses differ on who was shot when, do we disbelieve the event ever occurred at all? Of course not. And when Bible witnesses differ on what God wanted or said, we look to Jesus, we examine the whole of scripture to see if the contradiction is real or imagined, and we make a determination about the point the writer was trying to make. We don’t discard the whole story and we certainly don’t discard the entire collection of books!
3. See #1 and 2 above.
I’ll prayerfully consider whether I am making my point adequately or if I am hurting the faith of those who read. If I am not doing my job well, I will be compelled to pull this site down.
For now, I am printing in full an article/blog by one of my heroes, Leroy Garrett. It speaks to the point of the formation of the canon and how we formed our church. He does not go further in this article to discuss the fact that the canon of scripture continues IN the church but I think you see that implied. You can read all of his work for free at www.leroygarrett.org. He is worth reading.
DID THE NEW TESTAMENT PRODUCE THE CHURCH?
In my youth I sat at the feet of N. B. Hardman at Freed-Hardeman College and other of our noted scholars at Abilene Christian College, including Homer Hailey. I was uniquely blessed to be educated by the best that Churches of Christ had. Now into my 90s I remain thankful for that experience, and I love and appreciate those men for who they were and what they stood for. But as I look back over more than a half-century of history of Churches of Christ I realize that those dear men and we their students, along with Churches of Christ in general, have bought into a colossal fallacy.
It might be called the Restored Church fallacy, which assumes that the true church ceased to exist for 1800 years, and that our pioneers in the Restoration Movement came along and restored the authentic, apostolic church. This they did by identifying the true church — in name, doctrine, and practice? — in the New Testament, which they made a pattern or blueprint. We came to call this New Testament Christianity, a term we may have coined ourselves, for it is not likely to be found outside our own circles. But we do share the term Restoration Movement with others, including the Mormons, with whom we also share the only true church fallacy. But we and the Mormons, along with all restorationists, see a different true church in the blueprint, and thus a multiplicity of sects. And we have compounded this fallacy by presuming that this is our heritage in Stone-Campbell. Over the years I have endeavored to show that Stone-Campbell sought to reform the church that has always existed by a restoration of the ancient order?– a New Reformation Campbell called it — which is a far cry from the restored church assumption.
This myth presumes that the New Testament produced the church, and that this is our mission — to get the right take on the New Testament and build the church according to that pattern. But the primitive churches — Jerusalem, Antioch, Thessalonica, Corinth — did not have the New Testament. There were many in those churches who lived and died having never seen what we call the New Testament. If you had asked them about New Testament Christianity? they would not have known what you were talking about.
This can only mean that it was the church that produced the New Testament, and not the New Testament the church. Even then the emergence of what we know as the New Testament was gradual, incidental, and even unintentional. The apostles never said, “We must get with it and write a Bible.” The earliest documents, Paul’s two letters to the Thessalonians, would never have been written had there not been problems in that church that needed his attention. So with the Corinthian correspondence. And Luke did not see himself writing Luke-Acts as part of a book, but to one man to whom he wanted to tell the Story aright. While all the documents that make up the New Testament were written within the first century they only gradually came to be recognized as Scripture and canonized. It was well into the fourth century before the New Testament as we know it, all 27 books, were listed as canonized Scripture.
This makes it a problem to refer to the New Testament as our authority, for it was not the authority of the primitive churches. Jesus Christ was their authority. Our Lord himself points to the rule that makes Scripture authoritative; “You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life, and these are they which testify of me.” (John 5:39). Jesus Christ is the head and the authority of the church, and only in him is eternal life. Redemption is in a Person, not in a book, and multitudes were saved, lived and died in the faith, long before there was a book. This means that Scripture — whether the Old or New Testaments – is authoritative as it testifies of Christ, as it glorifies him, and reveals information about him. Scripture might be seen as a telescope through which one sees Christ, both in prophecy and fulfillment.
Scripture also has broader application and more evident authority when it speaks of superlative facts, such as the wondrous works of God, and when it refers to universal principles and things permanent rather than things local and temporary. All truths are equally true, but all truths are not equally important. That Jesus was born in Bethlehem is as true as that he was the Christ, but not as important. It is the vital truths — the fundamentals — that speak with authority.
These are the things the earliest believers would have known by way of their Scriptures (Old Testament), the apostles doctrine (Acts 2:42), and oral tradition long before there was a New Testament. Greet one another with a holy kiss is enjoined four times by Paul, and it may have been authoritative in his churches, but it was not written to us and is not catholic in nature. So with Jesus instructing his disciples to wash each other’s feet — both a command and an example — but it was still circumstantial and not universal. In our time we might kiss? and wash feet in ways more meaningful to our way of life.
It is informing to realize that the New Testament was not written to us, nor is it about us. It is for us — or speaks to us as the word of God — only as it speaks universally. I like the way the late Professor Henry J. Cadbury of Harvard put it: ?”It is not that we are to do precisely as they did, but we are to do for our generation what they did for theirs.”?
Some of the experiences of the Jerusalem community of faith will further illustrate what I am saying. Luke tells us in Acts 2 and 4 that the church had a communal system of sharing, that they owned all things in common, even to selling what they owned, placing the proceeds at the apostles’ feet, and sharing equally. But this is not about us. Luke was an historian. He’s telling the reader what the Jerusalem church did. It is by no means a mandate for all churches to come. It is not universal.
But when Luke tells about Pentecost in Acts 2 he speaks in universal, even cosmic, terms. Jesus is preached as the risen Lord, whom the Pentecostians had crucified. They are told to repent and be baptized for the remission of their sins and receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. There is nothing local or circumstantial here. It rings with catholicity.
Equally impressive is the account of the Jerusalem council in Acts 15. A weighty problem faced the church with the coming in of the Gentiles. Do they have to become Jews by being circumcised in order to be Christians? There was considerable disputation, but the apostles, elders, and even the Holy Spirit at last reached a decision. They wrote a letter to the Gentile congregations, requiring of them only these necessary things, and circumcision was not one of them, but to eat only kosher meat was!
Even though this letter was written by apostles, elders, and even the Holy Spirit, and listed necessary things — and is in the New Testament — it was not written to us and is not about us. It was vital to the peace of the primitive church, but clearly circumstantial and temporary.
But in Act 10:34-35 the apostle Peter, troubled by the same Gentile problem, after witnessing the Holy Spirit coming upon Gentile believers, was led to say what he thought he would never say, “In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality, but in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him.”? This exciting, mind-boggling affirmation is not only wonderfully catholic, but it is cosmic in that unlike the letter in Act 15 it reaches out to all mankind, every person, and all religions requiring the one necessary thing: reverence for God and doing what is right.
While it is not part of my thesis in this essay, we may also conclude that this is the answer to our divisions and the only way to Christian unity;
In things universal and permanent, unity;
In things temporal and transient, liberty;
In all things, love.
August 9th, 2012 at 4:24 pm
Patrick….
I love your heart and how you are concerned for the faith and hearts of those who read your blog. I can’t tell you it is right or wrong to take down the blog…only God through the Holy Spirit convicting your heart can tell you that. What I will say is that no matter how eloquely you express your thoughts or how accurately you represent God’s word, there will ALWAYS be people who interpret it differently and it may cause them to stumble…but at least they’re thinking and seeking. Your blogs and sermons and challenged, encouraged and taught me a great deal and I for one hope you continue sharing your walk, thoughts and discoveries as you grow in your faith as well. Keep sharing what God puts on your heart and let Him take care of the rest. Afterall, even the Bible says the truth will be a stumbling block to some. Change is slow and hard….give the folks some more time and some more blogs to think about. Love you. Hopefully I’ll see you when I am in CO in Sept.
August 9th, 2012 at 4:29 pm
“You diligently study the scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life.” -Jesus. Meaning that’s not the case at all. Be careful where you make your stand folks. He might be talking to you.
August 9th, 2012 at 4:41 pm
very challenging words, lots to think about and sort through. I always appreciate the way you point out the fallacies in so many of our assumptions and teachings and try to get back to what Jesus actually said and what the Bible actually says.
August 9th, 2012 at 4:47 pm
well stated, and thank you for sharing garrett’s article.
August 9th, 2012 at 4:54 pm
Keep writing Patrick. Sad as it is, there are those who will misunderstand or misrepresent no matter how hard you try. I’ve been visiting a number of churches this year and have been disappointed in the lack of depth found in Bible classes (and I think there are people who want more depth). We need people to challenge us. We need to think about any number of things including those you have brought up. Keep up the good work!
August 9th, 2012 at 5:17 pm
Obviously the final decision is yours, but there is such a wealth of information and insight in your writings. I, personally, would hate to see you pull it off-line. I have used some of your writings (giving you credit and referring people to your blogs) in small group studies and the group loved the discussion. To what degree this makes any difference at all, I would have your back, brother!
August 9th, 2012 at 5:22 pm
Wow. You speak volumes here, and while I am challenged in my thinking and upbringing, I believe you are spot on. I pray that while we strive to make God’s Truth our tradition, He will continue to help us discern between Truth and traditions of men.
August 9th, 2012 at 5:23 pm
I have been reading your blog for a couple of years at least, and this is the best post I’ve read so far. I hope and pray you won’t find it necessary to take down the site. I’ve not always agreed with you, but I’ve always, always had something to consider, think about, and pray about after reading your posts.
I am an almost-40 year old, “born and raised” in the CofC, and my entire life I have felt frustrated (understatement) by the way “we” say and do things. Your post today, and especially the words of Leroy Garrett, gave answers to the cognitive dissonance I’ve felt my entire life as a member of this “tribe” (as you put it). The “direct command, approved example, necessary inference” way of thinking, teaching, preaching, and believing has made my head and heart hurt so much. When asked what my problems with the DCENI approach were, I could never formulate a strong enough response, (especially since sharing a negative opinion of such is considered like blasphemy). But Mr. Garrett’s words gave answers to my frustration. Obviously, there are more problems for me than just DCENI, but the bulk of my issues come back to that approach and that way of viewing the Bible. Mr. Garrett’s words may not resonate or make sense to those with whom I am living, speaking (or studying or worshiping), but they offer me a freedom, even if in my own mind, and an answer to why I feel what I feel and believe what I believe.
And today, as has happened before after reading your posts, I feel just a little bit less like a square peg trying to fit in a round hole. Please keep writing and teaching and sharing, for the benefit of all the square pegs out there.
August 9th, 2012 at 5:51 pm
Your post are powerful and thought provoking. You have studied the scriptures and the historical accounts so I can take your in work and share it with High School students. I believe your writings have and will challenge the the C of C as it looks today and for years to come.
August 9th, 2012 at 7:30 pm
thank you for saying that which i, who am not scholarly, would like to put into words…..in a very small way, there are hundreds of us trying to voice these very thoughts. an old friend who loves you……
August 9th, 2012 at 9:09 pm
A true stumbling block keeps people out of the church. People in the church may disagree with your analysis, but it cannot be a stumbling block to them. I believe your explanations may remove some stumbling blocks that have kept thinking people out of the church, so keep blogging!
August 10th, 2012 at 12:12 am
Patrick, it sounds strange, but I think people have more trouble with saying that God did not order the destruction of the Canaanites than the other things you have pointed out. Those other things seem like minor editorial or copying changes, but so much of the story of Israel is about rescue from Egypt and the following destruction and taking of Canaan. I think I understand your belief about that, and it holds appeal for me. But because it is such a large chunk of the story, and because the Bible we read says God told them to destroy the Canaanites, it gives people difficulty.
I understand that, too. If the whole Bible is not correct, then it becomes a question of picking what you believe is correct. But so many have done that to the detriment of the Gospel. People don’t know where it stops. It is scary and uncertain, and that’s what causes people heartburn. It’s a mixture of fear, uncertainty, tradition, and teaching that they’ve (we’ve) heard for many years.
August 10th, 2012 at 1:21 am
(Smile)
Bro. Patrick, whenever I have similar feelings like you’ve shared, I remember the words of the Holy Spirit through Paul say, “Be strong in the Lord and in the power of his might.”. You keep writing/blogging for Jesus!
It is an honor to hold up the blood-stained banner of Christ!!!
August 10th, 2012 at 4:27 am
If the bible states that God commanded the Israelites to commit the Canaanite genocide then how do you know that this genocide cannot “be laid at the feet of God”? Is it just because this was genocide and because genocide is horrific you just can’t imagine God commanding this? I’m not sure what makes you believe this.
I think the person who said, “All I get now is ‘Jesus existed’” matches my feelings as well. It feels like you’re saying that we cannot get anything authoritatively from the bible other than this. How do we know which verses were inspired or spoken by God and which are not?
Leviticus 20:13 says that homosexuals are to be executed. Is this God’s word or just man’s?
In Acts 2:38 Peter said – or was claimed to have said by the writer of Acts – “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” If there’s a disagreement between two Christians about whether baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sins couldn’t the Christian who doesn’t believe it’s necessary just simply use your logic and say that they don’t believe that Peter actually said this or that this was just Peter’s words, not God’s, or the writer misquoted Peter?
If I’m misunderstanding your logic concerning this please let me know. I’m just having a hard time finding a practical application to picking and choosing which verses were inspired by God and which were not.
August 10th, 2012 at 3:16 pm
Are you suggesting that we kill homosexuals? Or should we kill our children when they misbehave? Should we force those who married outside the faith to divorce and send their children away (re: Ezra) or allow them to stay (re: some parts of Deuteronomy and Amos)? You already pick and choose. It is just time to be honest about it and find a consistent way to do it.
August 25th, 2012 at 7:53 pm
Right on, Patrick! Makes me think of The Blue Parakeet. Well said my brother.
August 10th, 2012 at 11:21 am
Patrick,
I know that time flies when you are having fun, but when did you turn 90?
“Now into my 90s I remain”
Don
August 10th, 2012 at 3:15 pm
Someone told me I’m as old as I feel so… I’m sticking with my story…
August 25th, 2012 at 7:54 pm
You may want to try an edartarectomy, too. I am 65 and after my procedure I feel like 59 again!
August 10th, 2012 at 7:17 pm
I believe that most members of our church are searching for answers that you provide in your blogs. There will always be those who retain a narrow view and cling to their traditions. If our faith can’t hold up to close scrunity, then it is either a weak faith or an errant one. Keep up the good work. God Bless.
August 10th, 2012 at 7:19 pm
“Now into my 90s I …” ?? (:>)
August 10th, 2012 at 9:19 pm
Patrick, as I told you a couple of weeks ago, you are teaching many of the same things I have been teaching for 30 years. I too was raised in a very traditional church, and have been recovering for most of my adult life. And by the say, I do not agree with you on every point–surprise. But your articles are not only very interesting to me but also challenge me to be a better student (disciple) of Jesus. There have been some on both the left and right who have told me I am a heretic; the same people treat Leroy the same way; welcome to our world. They will be there whether you write your articles and preach Jesus or not. I like many others find your articles and preaching to be a breath of fresh air and well worth my time to read your blogs and actually listen to what you have to say in your Bible classes and sermons. Thanks, and do please continue to keep people such as me challenged to become more Christ like and more open to the thinking of my fellow Christians.
No person who disagrees can even tell you what form of proof he would find acceptable from you concerning your teaching.
August 10th, 2012 at 11:57 pm
folks can use your blog as an excuse to dump their faith the same way someone can flatten their thumb with a hammer. If you use any tool or material in the wrong way, bad things can happen. You noted that yourself in the book list a few blogs ago, mentioning one or two books where if you don’t have strong faith, stay away from the book. Iron sharpens iron, but it cuts paper.
Personally, I appreciate the way your blog makes me think. Whether or not I agree with this point or that point, I’m forced to consider it. Since the brain is like a muscle in that it gets stronger when used, it’s all good.
August 11th, 2012 at 1:15 am
Patrick, your writings challenge and upset those who have their faith in the inerrancy of the Bible, not in Jesus. If their faith is lost because they have been forced to question, then their faith was misplaced in the beginning. I’ve been compared to a satanic atheist and written up as a wolf in sheep’s clothing, and I don’t even teach. All I did was ask questions in some Yahoo groups! I was asked how a “woman of my Christian maturity” could ask such things. Shakes head.
August 11th, 2012 at 1:46 am
No, of course I’m not suggesting that we kill homosexuals. I agree, we do already pick and choose but your logic, I believe, takes it to a whole new level and I’m just trying to follow this logic in a practical sense.
What is this consistent way to pick and choose then? Most Christians today choose to believe that killing homosexuals is wrong and that it should not be done however most still believe that homosexuality is an abomination as claimed by the OT and is a sin. Tomorrow most Christians may believe that homosexuality is not a sin and in that case they will have chosen to believe that the verses that claim that it is a sin were not actually from God. It seems that this method of picking and choosing is consistent with the ever changing moral beliefs of mankind and not much more.
For most of the history of mankind killing homosexuals probably wasn’t considered immoral by most people and believing that God could have commanded this was probably easy for them to accept. Now our moral belief has changed and we choose not to believe that God actually commanded this. This is obviously not consistent with anything except mankind’s ever changing moral beliefs so what we’re left to believe then – if you follow your logic to its logical end – is that the word of God is ever changing. What he is believed to have said yesterday will be different from what he is believed to have said tomorrow and it will be different based upon which civilization you’re in too because different civilizations develop different moral beliefs. If I’m mischaracterizing what you’re saying please let me know and please also explain how we are to consistently pick and choose what to believe is God’s word and how this picking and choosing is not directly related to mankind’s ever changing moral beliefs.
August 11th, 2012 at 1:55 am
I’ve
I’ve already answered your question in detail in earlier blogs and given a list of this and other writings that deal with that two blogs back. I’ll direct you to those.
August 12th, 2012 at 12:48 am
I can’t find an answer to my question in any of your blogs from the past several months. Maybe I’m missing it and it’s an even older blog? If so, please direct me to it if you have time. In your previous blogs I find some talk of Jesus picking and choosing and altering scripture but I’m assuming you’re not saying that we should be allowed to do that as well. I also find where you claim that many of the really awful verses of the OT were not actually the word of God even though the bible claims that they are. So I’ve seen where you pick and choose and you freely admit that you do and that we all should but the real question that is still unanswered is: what is the consistent method that we should use to do this?
If you have a consistent method that you use to pick and choose could you please use that method to tell me how much of the book of Revelation is the word of God and how much of the book of Hebrews is the word of God. Hebrews, as you know, does not have a claim of authorship though some scholars think it may be Paul but no one really knows. If I had a method of picking and choosing I might choose to exclude the entire book of Hebrews from being considered the word of God and all other books that do not have a claim of authorship in the text. Would you as well? If not, would I be wrong in picking and choosing in this way?
August 15th, 2012 at 4:23 am
Chris,
Recently, I have been mulling over another way of understanding the genocide passages, the Ezra divorce passages, the Levitical code, etc. Brian McLaren proposes that we should approach the biblical story as narrative, as does Patrick, but instead of explaining these types of events or commands as being mistakenly blamed on God to excuse human behavior, McLaren sees these events as God working within an evolving human context. So, when God interacts with the Israelites in an age of constant tribal feuding and war, commanding them to wipe out a people and drive them from the land is an acceptable practice for that group during that time. God allows people to live within they’re contexts. He still calls them to a higher moral code than is culturally normal, but he does so in increments that build over time. For instance, if God had given Jesus’ command of turning the other cheek to the Israelites as they entered Canaan, our Bible would have ended at the beginning of Joshua. Instead, even as the Israelites were in the middle of a bloody invasion, God also called them to an ethical code that was counter-cultural at their time. The commands about how to treat foreigners and slaves, as well as the commands about Jubilee are good examples of this.
As time went by, God continued to call people to higher and higher levels of morality (see the prophets’ emphasis on social justice and truly righteous living). God could make these demands of his people more easily at this point in history because the Israelites, as a people group, had been established, and they we’re living in an age of huge empires (which they never controlled).
Jesus continued calling people to an even higher standard, and if I have understood Patrick’s statements on the blog, his teachings and lifestyle encompass everything God wanted from his people all along. But in McLaren’s view, rather than seeing the God of genocides in the Old Testament as contradictory to Jesus, Jesus is the natural evolution and fulfillment of what God has been slowly revealing over millennia.
McLaren would then push farther than what I’ve heard Patrick say, by suggesting that the Bible is not the end of this narrative. If God has been slowly revealing a higher level of morality over time (within the context of various cultures), then that doesn’t stop with Jesus and the apostles. Rather, one of the functions of the Holy Spirit and of the Church (universal) is to continue calling people to a higher standard as time goes on. The Jerusalem council that Patrick mentioned in this blog is a perfect example, and the church has been doing this for the past 2,000 years. As an example, think of slavery. Paul never denounced slavery, but he did call Christian slaves and slave owners to a higher ethic than others. Almost two millennia later, the church began discussing (ok, fighting) about whether slavery should be allowed to stand. And now, though the Bible never says slavery is wrong, the church is in basically unanimous support of the fact that slavery is a sinful institution. Rather than saying that Paul wasn’t speaking on God’s behalf when he failed to condemn slavery, McLaren’s line of thought would suggest that God was working within a cultural context, but as that context changed, the church was able to discover another, deeper moral reality.
Also, pertaining to your questions about Revelation and Hebrews, I’d refer you to Patrick’s other blog (which he mentioned one or two posts ago). He has two whole series on the books we have and the ones we don’t. I think he recommended reading about 5 of them, but they were so interesting, I ended up reading about a dozen.
August 17th, 2012 at 3:08 am
Aaron,
So you’re saying that God did command the genocide in the OT. Patrick, from what I understand, does not think that God commanded this genocide and that the authors of the OT who claim that he did must have been speaking without the inspiration of God. So two people who probably have the best of intentions when it comes to trying to understand the bible cannot even agree on which parts of the bible are actually the word of God. Yet this book has been around for thousands of years and honest, sincere people are still trying to figure out the very basics of making sense of it?
God may have called them to a higher moral code on occasion but many times he did just the opposite. He commanded his people to kill homosexuals. That’s not calling his people to a higher moral code – that’s just immoral. He killed a guy for picking up sticks on the Sabbath and commanded that adulterers should be executed.
What about the people who were way ahead of their time? Imagine a highly intelligent Israelite who thought that all of these executions for minor sins or crimes were immoral or that invading another nation and killing old people and babies was not the right thing to do. I’m sure there were some of them who had thoughts like this during these times. Imagine if they spoke up and said that they believed this was wrong and immoral. They probably would’ve been killed too. Imagine if you were alive during this time. Would you just go along with all of these atrocities commanded by God knowing that there was a better way – a higher moral standard?
How can Jesus be the fulfillment of “what God has been slowly revealing”? How is ‘kill adulterers’ – commanded by God in the OT to ‘don’t kill adulterers’ – commanded by example by Jesus in the NT – a fulfillment of God’s plan? It’s just the opposite of what he originally commanded!
If the Holy Spirit is continuing to call people to a higher standard then what are some things that in the NT that you think are outdated and do not meet the higher standard that we have today? How about Ananias and Sapphira being killed for lying? I’d say that most people and most Christians don’t believe that someone should be killed for lying especially with such an insignificant lie like theirs. Are you ready to tell God that he was wrong for doing that because we’ve evolved to a higher standard now?
1 Tim 2:12 say, “But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man. She must remain quiet.” Many churches allow women to take leadership roles in church. Maybe it’s because they believe that they’ve evolved to a higher moral standard and that it’s ok to disregard the words of Paul. Would you agree with them? If not, is it because you have not evolved to a moral standard as high as theirs? Is everything in the bible therefore permitted to be changed simply because people believe that they’ve evolved to a higher moral standard?
September 17th, 2012 at 6:00 am
Righteousness did not evolve. Righteousness is. I also think some of the people on this blog are confusion the issue of executing homosexuals. Sexual immorality was a sin punishable by death in the Mosaic Law. Are you saying that law was wrong, or it was too harsh? These are Gods standards not ours. These harsh punishments are exactly what needs to happen fulfill the law. That’s exactly why Jesus had to die. He took our place. Jesus did not abolish the law, nor does he contradict it. He fulfilled it, because if we had to do it ourselves, we would all be destroyed.
September 1st, 2012 at 4:23 pm
It sounds like what you are asking for is wisdom and discernment. Remember, wisdom comes from God (James 1.15) – not from Patrick Meade.
Jesus said things that the disciples did not understand and it wasn’t until they had the help of the Holy Spirit and they had suffered that they understood much of what he said and how to ‘rightly divide the word of truth’.
Asking others to explain everything to you to your satisfaction is not realistic or, actually, Godly. You must want wisdom more than anything and value it above everything…it will cost you. I hope you continue your pursuit of it.
August 11th, 2012 at 1:36 pm
This is definitely strengthening my faith. Thanks so much.
August 12th, 2012 at 1:49 am
I really hope you continue. I have grown so much because of your blogs. God Bless you Patrick Mead.
August 15th, 2012 at 2:34 pm
I really hope you continue this blog too Patrick. You continue to help strengthen my faith and remember, there will always be those who disagree with you and try to discredit your work. Look at how some attack the bible continuously. And most of all, look at how some disagreed with Jesus Himself while he was actually here in the flesh and He did not give up. He kept right on despite the scoffers and unbelievers.
So God bless you for sharing your wonderful faith in our Lord and writing this blog that gives us information we would not have except for you.
August 16th, 2012 at 5:43 am
I always find myself not just reading but thinking when I visit your blog. I am grateful for your ministry to challenge us to get deeper in the word and more honest with ourselves. Christ is the Living Word. We worship him. The Bible is holy but it is not the fourth person of the Trinity. Blessings.
Bobby Valentine
August 17th, 2012 at 11:07 pm
You’re doing good Patrick. I need your thoughts in my walk, you continually open me to new concepts that remove myself and my own pride from the equation. You got this buddy….
August 19th, 2012 at 4:16 am
Thanks for the effort you put into these articles. I hope it is not an entirely thankless task.
I have never understood why people get bent out of shape about these things. Between us and God, the scriptures come from Him and are His responsibility. He is responsible for their utility and their veracity. And that includes all the copies and translations. If He can’t manage it, there is nothing we can do to take up the slack. More to the point, if He is satisfied with how it turned out, who am I to argue? I don’t see why we have to “prove them”. I’ve never had any trouble with what I’ve read in the scriptures that couldn’t be resolved by reading them some more. They are from God and have the power to communicate that no other writing has.
August 23rd, 2012 at 4:59 am
Since your love of reading has caused the words of probably some 10,000 books to cross your mind, and since your memory cannot be turned off, and since your craving for honesty won’t allow you to pretend inerrancy, your only choice in this matter would be to run and hide. Somehow I don’t think you’d do that. You didn’t write the book – you’re simply trying to harvest its crop. All of us pick and choose in our attempt to do that. It cannot be avoided.
August 24th, 2012 at 4:00 am
Patrick,
I meet Leroy Garrett about 23 years ago. Not in person, but through his writings. I was in my 20s at the time and worked in Dallas. I was so moved by his book The Stone Campbell Movement that I looked up his home telephone number and called him one day while at work. He lived about an hour north in Sherman. As soon as he answered the telephone I began weeping. (The guy who worked in the cubical next to me probably thought I had lost it.) The sound of Leroy’s voice touched me. I thanked him for opening my mind. I have yet to live up to the task he planted in my heart all these years. Thank you so much for giving me this gift today. May God bless Leroy Garrett in these late years. And may he raise up 100 believers to take his place.
Your work in this blog is also of great value. I frequently view your blog site, filled with anticipation on being enlightened. I can only imagine the amount of time that you invest in the work on this blog. Thank you my brother and teacher!
My search for The Truth has lead me in the direction of Orthodoxy. I have been studying Orthodoxy on my own for about a year now. Much of what Leroy says above is Orthodox.
Have you ever looked into the Orthodox faith? Have you already addressed Orthodoxy in prior postings on your blog? If I drafted some questions for answers that would help me and others looking into Orthodoxy, would you be interested in looking into it? Do you know someone who has already gone down this road who could help me?
Thank you Patrick.
August 25th, 2012 at 8:01 pm
Patrick,
I can’t express how much your blogs have helped me in my life. Please keep the wisdom and knowledge and experience coming our way. Even if you feel the need to change venues, keep us posted. I can forsee the day when you will even be welcomed in Texas!
We have created a church our kids don’t want to attend, but you have a way of speaking and reaching them. Many, many of us are listening but are afraid to speak yet.
We love you Patrick.
August 26th, 2012 at 9:26 pm
Patrick,
When I was in my teens, I wondered why “You will know them by their fruits” meant the things we deduced by using CENI. Yet, I put these things “on the back burner” and preached the tradition for many years. Over time I discovered I was not alone in questioning what I had been taught – the application, not the principles of faith in God and the reliability of the Bible to do what God gave it to do. That has made me more willing to speak out. My regret is that I was silent for so long.
I say this to encourage you to continue to write. Your blogs are an encouragement to many. Should you take this blog down, I would be poorer – but I would survive. There are others for whom you are the best hope they have of breaking the chains of human tradition – or maybe I should say that the One to whom you point them is that best hope. You are effective in putting His message into terms people today can understand – and I’m glad my kids were able to sit under the sound of your voice for several years at Rochester.
Keep up the good work!
September 2nd, 2012 at 6:39 am
Patrick,
I very much appreciate your blog as well as your online sermons and lessons. Here in rural West Virginia when strange ideas (or at least ideas that don’t exactly conform) run through my head, sometimes I can feel as if I am out of the fringe without support. The internet allows me to see that others are out there who don’t simply accept and support what they’ve always been told uncritically.
I’m not sure anything has strengthened my faith these past few years as much as seeing the concerns I’ve had addressed honestly. I understand that some say that these discussions harm their faith, but for me, the opposite is true. For too long I’ve had questions go through my mind that I never hear addressed. Just seeing these ideas dealt with honestly gives me hope. It helps to see that we really do believe that God is real, and that being real, he stands up to our examination. He isn’t simply some opiate that makes us feel better about our lives, some wispy bit of imagination that we don’t dare look at too closely, but instead is the solid center and source of all that is.
Thank you for daring to openly look for the truth. You have helped my faith immensely.
Marc Shoemaker
September 13th, 2012 at 6:51 pm
Patrick,
I do not agree with you that the Bible has err, though I’m not going to argue that here. It seems apparent in your writings that you are a true follower of Christ, and I don’t think you need to pull down your opinion because many don’t agree with you. You pose some tuff questions and make some good points that will inspire people to seek the truth for themselves. The protestant revalution happened because some people woke up and read the Bible and decided not to take everything the Church was feeding them. This is only my opinion. When in doubt pray for wisdom and seek guidance. That’s what I do whenever I come across a tuff passage. It hasn’t failed me yet. Besides, if I’m going to argue a point I’d like to argue against an intelligent person that covers his bases.